Once a year trades that can only be done by that player once

So my idea was what if you could gift a shiny or pokemon once a year from your assembly to any player. It would only be able to be done for each account once until the next time period it was allowed. Obviously their would be some mon restrictions like gible or dratini, but if player could gift any pokemon to any player once it would be kind of nice for those who want things that are beyond their control for example egg shinies.

A problem with this that comes to my mind is that anyone would be able to gift a new player a high-level Pokémon, removing any sense of progression.

I suppose there could be a level cap for this, but then where do we draw the line? Many shiny Pokémon can be obtained at levels that would still take dozens of hours of grinding for a new player to reach.

I highly doubt if you get one trade in a long period of time that a player would just gift it to a random player.

open trading brings a whoIe host of baIance probIems, and attracts bad actors.

this wiII open the door for peopIe to be abIe to profit off of irI trading (seII shinies and/or accounts) for $$$$

this is why runescape has aIways been so infested. right now there is IittIe incentive to do that in pmu.

but if we had open trading, we might see a humongous uptick in hackers and bots. that’s a hidden trade off.

once a year trade is too rare for that to openIy encourage that, so i think it’s a nice compromise.
might i suggest an even more reasonabIe compromise.

Once a (pmu hc anniversary) pokemon trade. Or once a -winners of insert contest-
that way it’s not guaranteed. making it Iess common, and harder to abuse.

whiIe theoreticaIIy true, i disagree with bird’s point. as pmu is aIready quite broken if pIayers choose to break the sense of progression, they can easiIy do so, aIready.

How about adding these conditions

  • Guildmaster (Or a new rank above that)
  • Must have 500k+ Explorer Points
  • Use 300k Explorer Points

Or to not lock yet another feature behind the massive grind that is reaching Guildmaster rank, ask either for both players to be the same rank (easier code wise) or for the traded Pokemon to be of roughly the same level (like 5 levels apart at most, depending on how the level is stored, might be harder).

With either of the above, new players would also be able to trade with each other, along with preventing trading of high level Pokemon to new accounts. And if you really want to be elitist, force shinies to only be tradeable for other shinies.

that incetivises players to not rank up. afterall nothing stops a bronze player from having lv100s apart from. not doing missions. which actually speeds up the leveling up process because your grinding less stuff-
i think it should be locked up to really high ranks afterall it’s meant to be a late game feature trading shinys and stuff, guildmaster may be a bit too harsh to maybe master*** or something but still i think having locked behing actually henganging with the mission board is a really good idea and i honestly think it should have more uses since honestly guildmaster rank barely does anything unless your a hoard maniac

that’s a easy solution, force shinys to be only traded with other shinys. if a new player can get thier hands on a shiny 3 hours in a feel like they deserve to be able to have a shiny dreepy or something lol.

Therefore, the other option of needing to have Pokemon of the same-ish level is better. That way they still have to grind to get the thing they want instead of getting it for free.

why not both? :pikathonk:

Me when I see another discussion about adding pokemon trading to the game…

Thematically doesn’t make much sense since you’d essentially be trading people (Yes, I know the shiny market exist, but that’s more so a side-effect of the guild meetup system), and mechanically creates a bunch of problems that are hard to solve without taking a half-step implementation (in this case what I’m seeing are strict level/time/rank restrictions), which wouldn’t work out well imo.

If you ask me, a trading system that isn’t accessible isn’t a exactly a good one.


I dunno, really. I guess I didn’t consider that option. :growlithethink:

1 Like


Just to preface, I’m discussing this more as a fellow player and not as much as a member of staff. We talked a bit about this topic before on the shiny discord so I’ll just sorta reiterate my thoughts more than anything else.

I’m not super sure how I feel about adding a trading method into this game. Trading is obviously a big feature in most Pokemon games, but in the way PMU works as an MMO, I think doing so would require a pretty big step in considering the how’s and the why’s of what you’d want to achieve. You propose some neat restrictions here with the annual trade, but I still wonder if such a method could still be abused somehow. We could add additional restrictions to cover that, but then when you add enough rules, we reach a couple problems:

  1. The system just becomes too convoluted and you feel like you need to spend way more time reading to understanding it than actually doing it.
  2. The work required to implement and discuss each of these stipulations becomes a lot. Staff are already in a bit of a struggle with this, having a ton of projects we’re working on (that we’ll hopefully get to showcase soon!) and I worry that the potential gains from introducing trading relative to the work it would take to do this vs some other stuff we have in the pipeline.

That said, one aspect from the discussion on the forums that I think this idea covers really well is that it allows people much freer access to Pokemon in time limited events. I currently feel as if we’re not doing enough to ensure access to these Pokemon, especially when they’re at the mercy of being introduced in another holiday cave (which for some can be a while). If anyone has any suggestions on how they want to tackle that problem, I’d love to see forum threads on that! Putting my staff hat on, we do read all the forum threads (even if we don’t always reply). It can just often be a hard task figuring out what it is we want to say on a topic, particularly if it’s something we’re working on but might be a very long time out or if it’s an idea we just want to shelve for a later time or discuss further.